3 ms·
That’s the ideal scenario. Sad that governments of bystander countries do not seem to want to help make that happen.
by strogonoff 5y ago
That’s the ideal scenario. Sad that governments of bystander countries do not seem to want to help make that happen.
- brabel 5y agoHey, they do want to help!! But they can't! Entering open conflict with Russia is the worst possible thing that could happen to Europe, even worse than letting Russia win this war, unfortunately for Ukrainians. Why? Because we're talking about nuclear war here... Russia's threats are not just buffling! Most people they were buffling with invading Ukraine... now we know they are dead serious about this and we absolutely should not take our chances. To those who think this is just a first step: it's not. It really is not. All other European states that could possibly be invaded or even just harassed by Russia are already part of NATO except maybe for Finland (which while not being a NATO member, has very close relationship with NATO and is likely to be defended by NATO even if they don't become members in the next few months) and Moldova. So anything Russia does in Europe after this war is over will very likely cause NATO to react militarily (which it made clear it wouldn't do in Ukraine before the war started) probably before Russia even has a chance to move, so the story will be very different.
- strogonoff 5y agoWhat I see here is people (not you, but those I respond to) saying two things: (A) Ukraine must win and (B) Europe won’t help. I love Ukraine and I want it to exist as an independent democratic country, yet I can’t help but think whoever says both (A) and (B) has probably evacuated all friends and family (if they were ever in Ukraine) and has no regard for the rest. Meanwhile, I have people there, and if we go the A + B route it is likely to drag on for weeks meaning I may lose them—not to genocide or mass murder, which from what I personally know so far strikes me as blatantly made-up propaganda, but to stray ordnance (I pray bombings don’t commence) and most importantly food shortages about to turn into literal hunger. To those people I say: if you can make (A) happen, make it happen; otherwise do everyone a favor, stop armchair-urging people to die and focus on diplomacy.
- brabel 5y agoVery sorry to hear you have family still in Ukraine. In respect to those people's lives, I believe that Ukraine MUST find an immediate solution with Russia - this is between those two nations before everything else. Those two nations are the ones whose citizens are dying. As cruel as it is to the people of Ukraine, the rest of Europe is not going to risk being in the same situation as they are in (much worse if Russia decided to use nukes as they *promised* to in case of interference). (B) is going to continue to be in the form of money, military and medical supplies, which seems to me to be far from enough to allow Ukraine to win in any meaningful way... at least not in months... it would take closer to a decade or so (think of how Vietnam or Afghanistan "won" against the USA). Is that better than try to find an agreement with Russia that would give a short term victory to Russia, but stop this destruction immediately? The world already has tremendous respect for the fight Ukraine has put up! They don't have anything to prove to anyone.